# SNAP Stakeholder Workshop: Fire Protection Sector December 2, 2015

# Welcome and Introductions

2

# Climate Action Plan: HFCs
 

## Continue international diplomacy  

### Lead negotiations under the Montreal Protocol to phase down HFCs  

### Global phase down could reduce over 90 gigatons of CO2eq by 2050 , equal to roughly two years worth of current global GHG emissions  

### Work with partners in the Climate and Clean Air Coalition to Reduce ShortLived Climate Pollutants to promote climate

- friendly alternatives to high

GWP HFCs, address technical standards, and reduce emissions from HFC use 

###  

## Address HFCs through domestic actions  

### Use existing Clean Air Act authority of Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program to approve climate

-friendly chemicals, prohibit some uses of most harmful 

## • Provide federal leadership by purchasing cleaner alternatives to HFCs whenever feasible and by transitioning to equipment using safe, more sustainable alternatives 3

# Scope of Meeting
 

# Background  

## Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program  

## Overview of Recent Actions & Future Considerations  

# Alternatives for Fire Protection Sector  

# Discussion

2

### • Acceptable

- those that reduce overall risk to human health & environment • Acceptable with use restrictions

- if needed to ensure safe use • Unacceptable 

# Evaluates alternatives & lists alternatives as:

• Aerosols; Foams; Refrigeration and A/C; Solvents; Fire Suppression; Adhesives, Coatings, Inks, etc. 

# Sectors include:

• Ozone
- Depletion Potential • Global Warming Potential • Flammability • Toxicity 

# Considers: • Local Air Quality • Ecosystem Effects • Occupational & Consumer Health/Safety 5

# SNAP Actions 2014-2015  

# Issued two acceptability notices adding alternatives  

# Issued new rule adding five low

- GWP flammable refrigerants with use conditions  

# Published Status Change Rule prohibiting certain HFCs in certain end

-uses  

## HFC Emissions Avoided: 54

- 64 MMTCO2eq in 2025 Near term changes can provide both near and long term benefits

6

# July 2015: Change of Status Rule

• HFC
- 125
- January 2016 • HFC
- 227ea & blends

- July 20, 2016 • HFC
- 134a
- July 20, 2016/January 1, 2018 

### Aerosols

• HFC
- 134a in New Light

- Duty Systems
- MY 2021 • HCFC & HFC Containing Blends in New Light

- Duty Systems
- MY 2017 

### Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning
• New Supermarket Systems

- January 2017 • New Remote Condensing Units

- January 2018 • New Vending Machines

- January 2019 • New Stand

- Alone Units (small medium

- temp, large medium

- temp, low

- temp)
- January 2019/January 2020 • Retrofitted Retail Food Refrig Equipment and Vending Machines

- July 20, 2016 

### Retail Food Refrigeration & Vending Machines

• All End

- Uses, Except Rigid PU Spray Foam

- Various dates between January 2017

-January 2021 

### Foams

# Some Key Principles Guiding Our Thinking  

# SNAP rules will continue to consider individual end

-uses  

# No across the board GWP cut offs  

# No prohibition on HFCs as a whole, or in any one sector  

# New HFCs or HFC blends may be listed if risk not greater than other available substitutes  

# Recognition that timing is a critical dimension and that each end use has unique considerations  

# Status change actions will be issued through notice and comment rulemaking
8

# September 11 Stakeholder Meeting  

# EPA considering proposed rule that could include :  

# Listing acceptable alternatives with use conditions  

### Refrigeration & air conditioning end

-uses for flammable refrigerants; Fire suppression: e.g., streaming agent for aviation 

##  

# Listing of unacceptable alternatives  

### Certain HC and HC blends for stationary AC retrofits and MVAC systems 

##  

# Change of listing status from acceptable to unacceptable  

### EPA considering later transition dates than in July 20th 

### final rule  

### End

-uses based on stakeholder comments, EPA analysis  

### Refrigeration and A/C  

### Rigid PU spray foam  

### Fire suppression: e.g., PFCs, SF6, HFC-23 9

# Next Steps  

# Continue to expand SNAP acceptable list  

# Continue to work with stakeholders  

### E.g., Food Cold Chain Workshop in Montreal (held November 21st)  

### Sector workshops and Stakeholder meetings 

###  

## Develop next SNAP Notice for acceptable listings  

## Develop next SNAP Rule to include alternatives that are:  

### Acceptable with use conditions  

### Unacceptable  

### Change of status

10

# Total Flooding System Applications

11 Commercial (including maritime) Industrial Aviation Military • Telecommuni cation facilities • Computer rooms • Data processing centers • Maritime • Museums • Libraries • Hospitals • Medical facilities • Clean rooms • Petrochemical facilities • Production lines • Grain elevators • Engine nacelles • APUs • Cargo compartments • Aircraft lavatory trash receptacles • Crew spaces of armored vehicles • Aviation engine nacelles and dry bays • Shipboard machinery spaces12 

### Total Flooding Alternatives GWP HCFCs and HCFC Blends 609 - 1,546 HFCs and HFC Blends 1,598 – 14,800 PFCs 8,830 – 8,860 FK- 5 - 1 - 12 ( NovecTM 1230) <1 CF 3 I 0.4 PBr 3 0 Inert Gas Blends 0 Inert Gas Generators <1 Carbon Dioxide 1 Water 0 Water Mist Systems 0 Powdered Aerosols 0

# Streaming Agent Applications

13 Commercial (including maritime) Industrial Aviation/Aerospace Military • Cable trays • Computer rooms • Data centers • Telecommunications facilities • Electronic compartments • Ship control rooms • Transmission facilities • Utility vaults • Art galleries • Banking facilities • Libraries • Retail and wholesale facilities • Warehouses • Process control facilities • Motor control rooms • Manufacturing plants • Clean rooms • Oil and gas facilities • Conventional and nuclear power plants • Hazardous materials storage areas • Onboard aircraft • Control towers • Aircraft flight lines • Aircraft ramps • Aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicles • Spacecraft facilities • Electronics facilities • Ship control rooms • Training • Aircraft flight lines14 

## Streaming Agent Alternatives GWP HCFC Blend B 222 HFCs 3,220 - 9,810 PFC 9,300 FK- 5 - 1 - 12 <1 FK- 6 - 1 - 14 (C7 Fluoroketone ) 1 CF 3 I 0.4 H Galden HFPEs 2,790 – 6,230 Dry Chemicals 0 Carbon Dioxide 1 Water 015 

###  

## EPA considering a proposed rule that may consider:  

## Listing of 2

- BTP as acceptable in certain applications  

## Change of listing status from acceptable to unacceptable for:  

### PFCs (C 3 

### F 8 

### and C4

### F 10

### ) in fire suppression total flooding uses  

### PFC (C 6

### F 14

### ) in fire suppression streaming uses 

###  

## Request for comments and updated information on total flooding uses of SF 6 

## and HFC

- 23  

## Comments on July SNAP final rule, recent petitions suggested EPA also consider fire suppression applications  

## Seeking stakeholder input pre

-proposal given interest in applications

# Open Dialogue – Questions and Answers

# Discussion Questions

17 

###  

## What specific end

-uses and applications need additional low

- GWP alternatives?
 

## Are additional submissions anticipated for fire protection applications (e.g., new chemicals, new blends, existing chemicals for new applications, new processes or technologies)?
 

## Under SNAP, a potential substitute is often submitted for review for more than one use in a particular sector. EPA reviews substitutes on an end

-use by end

-use (or end

-use category) basis. Is it helpful for EPA to move forward with listings in particular end

-uses where we have made a determination recognizing we may still be reviewing other end

-uses?